Solicitor for the Appellant: M.L. Chalmers (The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission)

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Solicitor for the Appellant: M.L. Chalmers (The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission)"

Transcription

1 HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. <<MOUNT ISA>> MINES LIMITED; LOU MARKS; EDWARD EMMETT; JENNIFER GEORGE AND OTHERS and NATIONAL OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY COMMISSION No. NG173 of 1992 FED No. 796 Discrimination Legislation - Administrative Law (1993) 118 ALR 80 (1993) 46 FCR 301 COURT IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NEW SOUTH WALES DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION BLACK CJ(1), LOCKHART(2) AND LEE(3) JJ HRNG SYDNEY, 29 September 1992 #DATE 9:11:1993 Counsel for the Appellant: D.M. Bennett QC and R.S. McColl Solicitor for the Appellant: M.L. Chalmers (The Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission) Counsel for the First Respondent: S.P. Charles QC and A.H. Bowne Solicitor for the First Respondent: R.P. Woods Solicitor for the Second - Twentieth Respondents: Australian Government Solicitor Counsel for Applicant on Motion: J. Basten and S. Winters Solicitor for Applicant on Motion: Public Interest Advocacy Centre ORDER The Court orders that: 1. The appeal be dismissed 2. The appellant pay two-thirds of the costs of the first respondent of the appeal. 3. The appellant pay the costs of the second to twentieth respondents of the appeal as submitting respondents. Note: Settlement and entry of orders is dealt with in Order 36 of the Federal Court Rules. JUDGE1 BLACK CJ This appeal raises important questions about the impact of the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) ("the SDA") upon the work of the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission ("the Commission") in performing the function given to it by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission Act 1985 (Cth) ("the NOHSC Act") of declaring national standards and codes of practice relating to occupational health and safety matters. 2. The issues have arisen in the context of the Commission's preparation of a draft National Inorganic Lead Control Standard ("the proposed standard") and a draft National Code of Practice for the Control and Safe Use of Inorganic Lead at Work ("the proposed code"). 3. The way in which the issues have arisen and the course of the litigation are described in detail in the reasons for judgment prepared by Lockhart J which I have had the advantage of reading and it is sufficient if I set out the paragraphs of the proposed standard and the proposed code that lie at the centre of this case. Paragraphs 14(1) and 14(2) of the proposed standard are

2 in the following terms: "14 (1) Criteria for exclusion from working in a lead-risk job are: (a) personal medical condition; (b) pregnancy; (c) breast feeding; and (d) such other basis as may be permitted under relevant anti-discrimination legislation. (2) These exclusions do not apply to non lead- risk jobs." 4. Paragraph 12.1 of the proposed code reads: "12.1 Regarding exclusion from working in a lead-risk job: (a) Individuals with certain medical conditions (such as impaired renal function, anaemia, haemoglobinopathies, neuropathies and reproductive problems) may be more susceptible to the adverse effects of lead on health. Exclusion from working a lead-risk job on such grounds should be in accordance with section 15 of the standard, Health Surveillance. (b) Lead is a particular health risk to the fetus. A pregnant employee should keep her blood lead level below 30 g/100 ml and as low as possible. (c) Infants are more susceptible to the health effects of lead than adults. A breastfeeding employee should keep her blood lead level below 30 g/100 ml and as low as possible. (d) We are advised by HREOC that employers wishing to exclude women, other than those pregnant or breastfeeding, from lead-risk jobs will need to seek an exemption from the relevant Sex Discrimination legislation." 5. The blood level of 30 g/100ml referred to in paragraph 12.1(b) of the proposed code is lower than the blood level proposed by paragraph 15(24) of the proposed standard for the immediate removal of an employee from a lead-risk job to a job that is not a lead-risk job. The latter blood level is 60 g/100ml. 6. As Lockhart J has noted, the learned primary judge, Davies J, declared that paragraph 14(1)(d) of the proposed standard and paragraph 12.1(d) of the proposed code would be invalid if they were adopted essentially because: (a) the Commission appeared to have abrogated part of its function to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ("HREOC") by accepting that HREOC should, through the exemption process, establish proper safety precautions for the lead industry and (b) because the Commission appeared to be overborne by the consideration of matters with which the SDA was concerned, and thereby had failed to develop a proper and adequate standard and code. Davies J also made an order that the Commission and its members, before adopting a standard and code for the lead industry, consider further whether there are any appropriate provisions which, in their opinion, should, from the point of view of occupational health and safety, be included in the standard and the code. 7. The Commission is established by s. 6 of the NOHSC Act for the objects set out in s. 7. The functions of the Commission are set out in s. 8 and the

3 functions specified in s. 8(1) include the following: "(a) To formulate policies and strategies relating to occupational health and safety matters;... (d) to review laws and awards relating to occupational health and safety matters; (e) to consider, and to make recommendations in relation to, proposals for the making of laws and awards relating to occupational health and safety matters; (f) to declare national standards and codes of practice; (g) to encourage and facilitate implementation of: (i)... (ii)... (ii) national standards and codes of practice; (h) to evaluate the effectiveness and implementation of:... (iv) national standards and codes of practice... (r) to consult and co-operate with other persons, organisations and governments on occupational health and safety matters. 8. Other functions of the Commission relate to research concerning occupational health and safety matters and s. 8(6) provides that in the performance of its function relating to research and testing the Commission shall pursue a policy directed towards the maintenance of scientific objectivity. 9. Section 38(1) of the NOHSC Act provides: "38. (1) The Commission may, by writing, declare national standards and codes of practice relating to occupational health and safety matters." 10. The primary judge rejected a submission that occupational health and safety was the sole consideration of the Commission and that the Commission ought to put concepts of sex discrimination totally from its mind. In rejecting that submission, his Honour said that the Commission could not look at matters of health and safety in the abstract and that its task was to prepare standards which would be a guide to the industry. Its task was, therefore, to prepare standards and codes which were practical and acceptable. His Honour, however, accepted the submission made on behalf of <<Mount Isa>> Mines Limited that it was not the task of the Commission to concern itself with the implementation of the SDA. 11. In his Honour's view, whilst the Commission was entitled to take account of the object which the SDA was designed to achieve and should, in any event, attempt to formulate a standard that was fair to employees whether male or female, the Commission was not limited in its consideration by the terms of the SDA. 12. On this appeal, HREOC contended that the Commission was obliged to be concerned with the SDA whereas <<Mount Isa>> Mines Limited contended that the Commission's functions were directed solely to health and safety issues and did not encompass any matters relating to equal opportunity or discrimination on the ground of sex. It was submitted that there was nothing in the NOHSC Act that suggested that the Commission, in declaring standards and codes of

4 practice, should or need take into account the SDA. 13. The NOHSC Act does not specify any matters that the Commission must or must not take into account for the purpose declaring national standards and codes of practice relating to occupational health and safety matters, but limits to the matters that may be taken into account may of course be implied from the subject-matter, scope and purpose of the legislation: see Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v. Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24 at When considering whether the SDA is outside the legitimate area for the Commission's consideration it is important to examine carefully the nature of the function that the Commission carries out and the power that it exercises when it declares standards and codes under s. 38 of the NOHSC. 15. As Davies J pointed out, the Commission cannot look at matters of health and safety in the abstract and its task is to prepare standards that will be a guide to the industry. Therefore, its task is to prepare standards and codes that are practical and acceptable. This follows from the nature of the national standards and codes of practice for which the NOHSC Act provides and also from the circumstance that the Commission's functions under s. 8(1) include those of encouraging and facilitating the implementation of national standards and codes and evaluating their effectiveness and implementation. 16. Since the national standards and codes of practice that the Commission may declare under s. 38 of the NOHSC Act are intended to operate as practical instruments in Australian workplaces, advisory in character but such that their implementation is to be encouraged by the Commission, the laws applying in those workplaces cannot be outside the area of relevance to the Commission's task. In fact, they may be of great importance to the Commission's function of declaring minimal standards and codes. This is particularly the case where the law in question is one that directly affects employment and is aimed at eliminating, so far as possible, discrimination on the ground of sex, marital status or pregnancy in the area of work. In my view there is no basis for any implication that the SDA is outside the scope of the Commission's consideration when preparing national standards and codes. 17. The Commission's functions in relation to such matters as testing and research and the publication of reports relating to occupational health and safety matters (as to which see ss. 8 (1)(k), (n), (t), (ta), (u) and (v)) raise quite different considerations. In the performance of its research and testing functions the Commission must pursue a policy directed towards the maintenance of scientific objectivity: s. 8(6). If the Commission's research shows that conditions in the workplace may impact differently upon men and women in ways that are relevant to occupational health and safety the Commission would obviously report upon that matter in accordance with proper standards of scientific objectivity. But the functions of research and report are quite distinct from the function of preparing standards for practical implementation in workplaces to which laws prohibiting discrimination apply. 18. In taking into account the SDA when preparing national standards and codes the Commission would of course be obliged to take into account the whole legislative scheme of the SDA including, most importantly in a case such as the present, the provisions of the SDA with respect to exemptions. Section 44 of the SDA provides that HREOC may grant exemptions from the operation of a provision of Division 1 (Discrimination in Work) or Division 2 (Discrimination in Other Areas). Exemptions or further exemptions under s. 44 may be granted

5 subject to terms and conditions and they must be granted for a specified period not exceeding 5 years. There is a right of review by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of decisions made by HREOC under s Section 44 is a very important provision and it was submitted by senior counsel for HREOC that in determining whether to grant an exemption under s. 44, HREOC could take into account conflicts between the objects of the SDA and economic factors affecting the applicant for an exemption. Choices of that nature obviously involve difficult questions, and decisions about them are committed by the SDA to HREOC and to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal by way of a review. 20. The Commission, in formulating a standard or a code in circumstances in which the SDA may be relevant, should recognise that the power to grant exemptions rests with HREOC and that a workplace standard that might involve unlawful discrimination on the ground of sex in the general case might, by reason of the grant of an exemption under s. 44, not be unlawful at all under Commonwealth law in the specific case and for the period of time to which the exemption applied. 21. It cannot have been intended that in cases where conditions in the workplace impact upon men and women differently the Commission should ignore the SDA, or on the other hand, out of concern for the policy of the SDA, fail to set standards. Nor can it have been intended that the Commission should leave it to HREOC to set occupational health and safety standards. 22. In my view the interaction between the SDA and the NOHSC Act is such that Commission may declare standards and codes that fully recognise the impact of the SDA both insofar as it prohibits discrimination in employment and insofar as the SDA provides for the grant of exemptions by HREOC and, on review, by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The Commission may thus declare standards and codes of practice that are applicable where no exemption has been granted and which are set in such a way as not to involve any discrimination. At the same time the Commission may also declare other standards and codes as being applicable if, but only if, by reason of an exemption from the SDA or equivalent legislation, differences in the application of the standards or codes that turn on a person's sex do not involve unlawful discrimination. 23. In this way the Commission's standards and codes will be capable of lawful implementation in the workplace under all circumstances so that if, in the exercise of its powers, the HREOC considers it appropriate to grant an exemption there may be an applicable standard and code appropriate to those circumstances. If no exemption is granted, there will still be an appropriate standard and code, formulated by reference to relevant occupational health and safety considerations but on the footing that there is no exemption from operation of the SDA. Each such standard and code would reflect the proper concerns of the Commission with occupational health and safety matters and its recognition of the application, to the workplaces to which its standards and codes are intended to apply, of laws prohibiting discrimination in the area of work on grounds that include the ground of sex. 24. In my view, the Commission did err in law in proposing paragraph 14(1)(d) of the proposed standard. Its function was, relevantly, to declare national standards relating to occupational health and safety matters. By taking the approach revealed by paragraph 14(1)(d) the Commission, on a mistaken view

6 about the interaction between the NOHSC Act and the SDA, in effect transferred to another body, HREOC, the performance of part of its functions. The SDA does not require this and the NOHSC Act does not authorise it. 25. Paragraph 12.1(d) of the proposed code may seem at first sight to be free from the problem revealed by paragraph 14(1)(d) of the proposed standard. However, on closer examination, what it reveals is that the Commission, again on a mistaken view about the interaction between the two Acts, has not dealt with the position of women who are neither pregnant nor breast-feeding. In taking this approach the Commission made an error of law concerning the scope of its functions. 26. There was no challenge to paragraphs 14(1)(b) (pregnancy) or 14(1)(c) (breast feeding) of the proposed standard so I express no opinion about whether conduct is in accordance with them might, in some circumstances, involve a contravention of the SDA. I would merely observe that what is reasonable (see for example s. 7(1)(b), as to pregnancy) will obviously vary according to time and circumstance. 27. I should mention some other questions that were raised in argument. I agree with Lockhart J for the reasons he gives that the presence of intention, motive or purpose relating to health does not detract from the conclusion that there is discrimination on the ground of sex where a women is excluded from work in the lead industry in the circumstances to which his Honour refers. 28. I also agree with Lockhart J in his rejection of the view that the matters the SDA specifies as constituting unacceptable bases for differential treatment (relevantly s. 5 (1)(a), (b) and (c)) can be relied upon to support the conclusion that the circumstances are not "the same" or are "materially different" for the purposes of s. 5(1). 29. The primary judge did not find it necessary to deal with the question whether there was any inconsistency between the provisions of the NOHSC Act and the SDA although the question was raised in argument before us on the appeal. It follows from what I have said about the interaction of the two Acts that in my view there is no inconsistency between them. 30. For the reasons I have given, I would dismiss the appeal. I agree with the orders for costs proposed by Lockhart J. JUDGE2 LOCKHART J This appeal from the judgment of a Judge of the Court (Davies J) raises interesting and important questions under the Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) ("the SD Act") and concerns its relationship with the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission Act 1985 (Cth) ("the NOHSC Act"). Mt <<Isa Mines Limited ("Mt Isa>>") (the applicant at first instance and the first respondent to this appeal) sought orders of review under the Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) ("the ADJR Act") and s. 39B of the Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth) in respect of an alleged decision made or conduct leading to a decision to be made by the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission ("the Commission") concerning the adoption of a standard and code for the lead industry in Australia. The other parties to the application at first instance were the eighteen members of the Commission, the Commission itself and the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission ("the HREOC"). 2. The Commission had been considering for some time the publication under s. 38 of the NOHSC Act of a standard and code of practice for persons and

7 companies engaged in the lead industry in which the presence of lead poses a risk to health. Mt <<Isa>>, a producer of lead, is one such company. The learned primary Judge declared that paragraph 14(1)(d) of the proposed National Inorganic Lead Control Standard ("the proposed standard") and paragraph 12.1(d) of the proposed National Code of Practice for the control and safe use of inorganic lead at work ("the proposed code"), each dated 4 December 1991, would be invalid if they were adopted, essentially on two grounds: (a) that the Commission appeared to have abrogated part of its function to the HREOC by accepting that the HREOC should, through its exemption process, establish proper safety precautions for the lead industry and (b) the Commission appeared to have been overborne by consideration of matters with which the SD Act is concerned, and thereby failed to develop a proper and adequate standard and code. His Honour ordered that the Commission and its members, before adopting a standard and code for the lead industry, consider further whether there are any appropriate provisions which in their opinion should from the point of view of occupational health and safety be included therein. His Honour ordered the Commission to pay the costs of Mt <<Isa>> of the proceeding. 3. The HREOC appealed to this Full Court from Davies J's judgment. The Commission and its members submitted to such order as the Court may see fit to make on the appeal and did not take part in argument. The active parties to the appeal were the HREOC and Mt <<Isa>>. The Court granted leave to the Public Interest Advocacy Centre ("the PIAC") to assist the Court as amicus curiae on a limited basis and had the benefit of the submissions of its counsel. 4. The Commission is a body corporate established under the NOHSC Act (s. 6). Section 7 of that Act defines the objects of the establishment of the Commission in these terms: "(a) the development among the members of the community of an awareness of issues relevant to occupational health and safety matters and the facilitation of public debate and discussion on such issues; (b) the provision, in the public interest, of a forum by which representatives of the Government of the Commonwealth, the Governments of the States and of employers and employees may consult together in, and participate in the development and formulation of policies and strategies relating to, occupational health and safety matters; and (c) the provision of a national focus for activities relating to occupational health and safety matters." 5. The functions of the Commission are specified in s. 8 and are numerous; but so far as presently relevant they include the following: "(a) to formulate policies and strategies relating to occupational health and safety matters; (b) to consider, and to make recommendations in relation to, the action that should be taken by, and to facilitate co-operation between, the Government of the Commonwealth, the Governments of the

8 States, employers, persons engaged in occupational activities and organizations of employers or of persons engaged in occupations on occupational health and safety matters;... (d) to review laws and awards relating to occupational health and safety matters;... (f) to declare national standards and codes of practice;... (r) to consult and co-operate with other persons, organizations and governments on occupational health and safety matters;..." 6. The expression "occupational health and safety matters" is defined in the interpretation section (s. 3) in the following terms: "'occupational health and safety matters' means matters relating to occupational health or occupational safety and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes matters relating to one or more of the following: (a) the physiological and psychological needs and well-being of persons engaged in occupations; (b) work-related death; (c) work-related trauma; (d) the prevention of work-related death or work-related trauma; (e) the protection of persons from, or from risk of, work-related death or work- related trauma; (f) the rehabilitation and re-training of persons who have suffered work-related trauma;..." 7. The expressions "occupation", "work-related death" and "work-related trauma" are also defined in s. 3, but I need not recite the definitions. 8. Part VI of the NOHSC Act is concerned with "National Standards and Codes of Practice". Section 38, which is included in Part VI, provides as follows: "(1) The Commission may, by writing, declare national standards and codes of practice relating to occupational health and safety matters. (2) Except as otherwise provided by a law other than this Act or by an award or instrument made under such a law, a national standard or code of practice is an instrument of an advisory character. (3) A national standard or code of practice shall be published in the prescribed manner. (4) Before declaring a national standard or code of practice, the Commission shall, by notice published in accordance with the

9 regulations - (a) set out the standard or code of practice the Commission proposes to declare; (b) invite interested persons to make representations in connection with the proposed standard or code of practice by such date as is specified in the notice; and (c) specify an address or addresses to which representations in connection with the proposed standard or code of practice may be forwarded. (5) A person may, not later than the date specified in the notice, make representations to the Commission in connection with the proposed standard or code of practice, and the Commission shall give due consideration to any representations so made and, if the Commission thinks fit, alter the proposed standard or code of practice. (6) The Commission shall, as soon as practicable after declaring a national standard or code of practice, give a copy of the national standard or code of practice to the Minister." 9. The Commission is empowered to direct that inquiries be conducted in respect of occupational health and safety matters (s. 39); and the procedures for the conduct of those inquiries are specified in Part VII: "Public Inquiries". 10. In the course of considering the publication under s. 38 of an appropriate standard and code of practice for persons and companies engaged in the lead industry, the Commission conducted extensive inquiries and consulted people and government agencies. The Sex Discrimination Commissioner (appointed pursuant to s. 96 and subsequent sections of the SD Act) addressed a National Occupational Health and Safety Lead Forum on 9 August 1990 and he criticised an early draft of the proposed standard in these terms: "The Proposed Standard is discriminatory. It discriminates against women. The discriminatory aspects of the Proposed Standard are contained in the requirements for medical certification. These passages are: 19.3 Medical certification for suitability to commence work should take into account age, potential for foetal exposure, general health and target organ susceptibility Criteria for exclusion from medical certification include: a. Age less than 16 years. An employer shall not permit a person below the age of 16 years to be present in a lead process area; b. Potential for a foetus to be exposed

10 to an elevated maternal blood level of greater than 30 g/100 ml at conception or at any stage of development (overtly discriminatory and offensive to women) c. Target organ susceptibility, including: i. impaired renal function, ii. anaemia, haemoglobinopathies, iii. neuropathies, and iv. reproductive problems. (NOSHC 1990, p emphasis added) The proposed standard calls for the identification of 'non lead risk' jobs, and for non-discriminatory employment practices in relation to these. This is welcome as far as it goes. But for jobs identified as 'lead risk' the draft Code takes an approach which is completely unacceptable. It fails to protect the rights of all workers to the safest working conditions feasible. It fails to respect the right of women to work without discrimination." 11. At the same forum an address was given by an officer of the Affirmative Action Agency who referred to a 1978 standard of the USA Occupational Safety and Health Administration which stated: "Exposures to lead can have serious effects on the reproductive function in males and females... because of the demonstrated adverse effects of lead on reproductive function in male and female, as well as the risk of genetic damage of lead on both ovum and sperm, it recommends a g/ml maximum permissible blood lead level in both males and females who wish to bear children." 12. On 11 October 1990 Mt <<Isa>>, being concerned with the constitution of an Expert Review Group or Lead Expert Working Group, wrote a letter to the Commission stating that the Commission "seriously misunderstood and exceeded its statutory purpose and powers" and requested the Commission to seek advice from the Department of the Attorney-General. The Commission took advice from the Attorney-General's Department which was to the effect that occupational health and safety matters did not encompass the health of the unborn foetus. The advice from the Department also said: "35. Accordingly, in exercising your powers under the NOHSC Act you are obliged to avoid treating women less favourably then, in circumstances that are the same or not materially different you would treat men by reason of a characteristic that appertains generally to women (eg the capacity to become pregnant)." 13. The advice referred also to s. 26 of the SD Act, a section which renders it unlawful for any person who performs any function or exercises any power under a Commonwealth law to discriminate against any other person on the ground of the other person's sex, marital status or pregnancy in the performance of that function.

11 14. Meetings of the NOHSC Standards Development Standing Committee Expert Working Group on Lead were held from time to time including a meeting on 24 April 1991 when its members discussed "whether to exclude certain women on the grounds of pregnancy and breast-feeding". A Ms P Hall, who represented the Department of Industrial Relations, Employment, Training and Further Education, NSW, advised members that the issue would not conflict with the SD Act. 15. On 13 June 1991 there was a meeting of the Lead Expert Working Group, the minutes of which record: "Ms P Hall presented a summary paper of issues involved, including legal opinion on the proposed removal levels for employees planning to have a family. Ms P Hall's paper is attached to these minutes. Members AGREED that the proposed standard should be modified so that it will not be in conflict with the Sex Discrimination Act 1984." 16. On 25 June 1991 there was a further meeting of the NOHSC Standards Development Standing Committee Expert Working Group on Lead. 17. On 3 July 1991 Dr Cathy Mead, the chairperson of the Lead Expert Working Group, wrote a lengthy report to the Commission which included the following: "Anti-discrimination law prohibits treating men and women differently. Discriminating against women on the basis of 'child-bearing capacity' would amount to sex discrimination, and it would not be open to Worksafe to promulgate a standard which was discriminatory in that way. This is irrespective of whether there is a toxicological or health-based reason for such action. Obviously, it would have been simpler if the reproductive effects on men and women occurred at the same blood lead level. The LEWG doesn't believe this has been demonstrated to be the case." 18. On 17 September 1991 the Commission met and the minutes of its meeting record, inter alia, the following: "19. The National Commission CONSIDERED the issues of the accommodation of equal opportunity and employers' and employees' duties in the lead standard; the implications of the potential to compromise the employer's duty of care by imposition of a duty on the employee to inform the employer of risk; and the legal liability of all involved parties. Copies of preliminary legal advice from a Queen's Counsel briefed at the request of the National Commission were made available to members." 19. On 17 October 1991 Mt <<Isa>> wrote a letter to the Commission referring to its establishment of a "task force" to develop a plan to accommodate equal opportunities and health and safety in the lead industry. The letter said, inter alia:

12 "We do not believe that Worksafe Australia (a reference to the Commission) is legally obliged to give sex discrimination issues the same consideration as occupational health and safety issues and in doing so is in breach of its statutory responsibilities. In our submissions to Worksafe Australia opposing a gender-neutral code and standard, we have stressed our social and legal obligations to employees and their children. Ms Beazley Q.C.'s advices affirm that a duty of care can be owed by an employer to a foetus carried by a female employee and notes that by imposing a gender-neutral standard Worksafe may thereby be causing employers to breach a duty of care owed to unborn children." 20. On 25 October 1991 an officer of the Attorney-General's Department advised the Commission that it was bound to comply with the provisions of the SD Act and that the health of an unborn foetus was not the concern of the Commission for an unborn foetus was not a person and had no rights. This view was not adopted by officers of the Commission. It also attracted the following observations of Davies J: "I merely wish to make it clear that, in my view, the Commission's task is to concern itself not merely with 'persons engaged in occupations' but also with the impact which their occupations may have upon the health of members of their families, the effect of lead upon reproduction, the effect of lead upon an unborn foetus, the effect of lead upon a child who breastfeeds and like matters. These are all matters which are very much the concern of the Commission. The definition of 'occupational health and safety matters' is not to be read in any technical or limited way... The effect which a worker's employment may have upon the health of his or her children is within that concept." I agree with those observations of his Honour. 21. The HREOC played an active role in discussions with officers of the Commission; this appears from the affidavit by the secretary of HREOC, Mr Sidoti, who stated, inter alia: "10. In relation to the preparation of the lead standard the Commission (HREOC) has been involved as follows:... iii) In November 1988 Worksafe (the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission) held a national workshop on the safe use of lead which was attended by the Sex Discrimination Commissioner. At the conclusion of the Workshop it was agreed that a draft discussion paper and a Proposed National Standard and

13 Code of Practice would be further developed taking into account the views expressed at the workshop and that a tripartite study group, which would include a representative of the Commission, would visit workplaces employing lead processes. iv) On 16 and 17 March 1989 the Sex Discrimination Commissioner visited the <<Mount Isa>> mines of the applicant together with representatives from the ACTU, CAI, State Occupational Health Commissions, the Australian College of Occupational Medicine, State Equal Opportunity bodies and Worksafe. v) In March 1990 the South Australian Equal Opportunity Commission convened a National Workshop on Women and Lead. The Sex Discrimination Commissioner presented a paper to that Workshop. vi) In March 1990 Worksafe released 'Lead - A Public Discussion Paper' and called for public submissions in response to the document. The Sex Discrimination Commissioner prepared and forwarded a detailed submission in response. vii) On 9 August 1990 Worksafe held a 'Lead Forum' where discussion of the Worksafe document took place. The Sex Discrimination Commissioner addressed that forum. viii) In July 1991 the Sex Discrimination Commissioner delivered a paper on the lead industry and foetal protection policies in the United States and Australia to the Women, Management and Industrial Relations Conference held at Macquarie University. ix) On 14 November 1991 the Sex Discrimination Commissioner and I attended a meeting of the Worksafe Lead Task Force to discuss further the provisions in the proposed National Standard and Code dealing with the employment of women in the lead industry. At that meeting the Task Force reached substantial agreement on the provisions." 22. Following these discussions the proposed standard and code were prepared for the purpose of being considered by the Commission at its meeting on 4 December The adoption of the proposed standard and code has been deferred pending the conclusion of this proceeding.

14 23. The proposed standard includes the following paragraphs which are of particular relevance in this case: "14(1) Criteria for exclusion from working in a lead-risk job are: (a) personal medical condition; (b) pregnancy; (c) breast feeding; and (d) such other basis as may be permitted under relevant anti-discrimination legislation. (2) These exclusions do not apply to non lead-risk jobs (24) If the results of biological monitoring reveal that the confirmed blood lead level is at or above 2.9 mol/l (60 g/100 ml); or the employer or employee considers that an excessive exposure to lead has occurred, the employer shall: (a) immediately remove the employee from the lead-risk job to a job that is not a lead-risk job; (b) arrange for the employee to have a medical examination by an authorised medical practitioner within seven days; and (c) provide the authorised medical practitioner with a copy of the form in Schedule 4 with Part A filled in, signed and dated by the employer. (25) If an employee advises the employer that she is pregnant or is breast feeding, the employer shall immediately remove the employee from the lead-risk job to a job that is not a lead-risk job."... 17(6) An employee knowingly pregnant or breast feeding shall advise the employer as soon as practicable." 24. It is paragraph 14(1)(d) that is the principal subject of Mt <<Isa>>'s attack on the proposed standard. 25. The proposed code includes the following paragraphs: "7.1 Employers shall ensure that the information supplied to job applicants includes as a minimum the following: (a) lead is a toxic substance which is retained within the body long-term; (b) lead can affect the nervous and reproductive systems, reproductive system, kidneys and interfere with the ability of the body to make haemoglobin; (c) the unborn child is particularly susceptible to the effects of lead and on this basis employees who are pregnant or breastfeeding are excluded from working in

15 lead-risk jobs; Regarding exclusion from working in a lead-risk job: (a) Individuals with certain medical conditions (such as impaired renal function, anaemia, haemoglobinopathies, neuropathies and reproductive problems) may be more susceptible to the adverse effects of lead on health. Exclusion from working in a lead-risk job on such grounds should be in accordance with section 15 of the standard, Health Surveillance. (b) Lead is a particular health risk to the fetus (sic). A pregnant employee should keep her blood lead level below 30 g/100 ml and as low as possible. (c) Infants are more susceptible to the health effects of lead than adults. A breastfeeding employee should keep her blood lead level below 30 g/100 ml and as low as possible. (d) We are advised by HREOC that employers wishing to exclude women, other than those pregnant or breastfeeding, from lead-risk jobs will need to seek an exemption from the relevant Sex Discrimination legislation." 26. It is paragraph 12.1(d) that is the principal target of attack by Mt <<Isa>> on the proposed code. 27. Davies J observed that the proposed standard and code did not distinguish between male and female employees otherwise than as set out above notwithstanding the view expressed by Dr Mead that the Expert Working Group considered that the effects on reproduction did not occur at the same blood levels for both males and females or at least that it had not been demonstrated that that was so. 28. There appears to be some controversy as to the relative degree of risk created by industrial exposure to lead of fertile men on the one hand and fertile or breast-feeding women on the other. Mt <<Isa>> expresses concern that women working in the lead industry may become pregnant or be pregnant at a time when their lead levels are unduly high. It appears to be accepted by the parties, at least for the purposes of this case, that the reproductive capacity of women may be damaged by a lower lead level than is the case with males. HREOC took an active interest in the problems in the lead industry with a view to persuading employers to introduce protective measures applicable to all employees which would reduce the level of exposure to such an extent that neither male nor female employees nor members of their families would be at risk. HREOC therefore introduced a practice of receiving applications under s. 44 of the SD Act from employers in the lead industry for exemption from the operation of that Act. Section 44 is an important section; it empowers the Commission by instrument in writing to grant to persons or classes of persons exemption from the operation of provisions of Division 1 or 2 specified in the instrument. Division 1 (of Part II) relates to discrimination in work and Division 2 to discrimination in other areas.

16 29. HREOC appears to have granted such exemptions to various employers; but seeks to persuade employers to introduce protective measures suitable to cover the whole of the workforce in an equal manner. Thus HREOC took an active interest in the alleged discriminatory effect of practices adopted in the lead industry. 30. Davies J said in his reasons for judgment: "The task of the Commission is a controversial one for exposure to lead may affect reproductive capacity and women may be more at risk than men. Lead may be harmful to the unborn foetus and undue lead levels in a mother who breastfeeds a child may affect the health and welfare of the child. Thus, exposure to lead has a tendency to affect women more than men. In the result, a view has developed that the imposition of too strict health precautions can lead to discrimination against women in employment in lead risk industries." 31. The correctness of this passage from his Honour's judgment was not disputed in argument before us. 32. The case of Mt <<Isa>> was essentially that in the preparation of the draft standard and code intended to be adopted by the Commission and published pursuant to s. 38(3) of the NOHSC Act, officers of the Commission were overborne by sex discrimination considerations and failed to give proper attention to what shall be the concern of the Commission, namely, the adoption of proper standards and codes to guide persons in lead risk industries in the protection of health and safety. 33. Davies J rejected the submission of counsel for Mt <<Isa>> that occupational health and safety was the sole consideration of the Commission and that the Commission ought to put concepts of sex discrimination totally from its mind. His Honour said: "However, the Commission cannot look at matters of health and safety in the abstract. Its task is to prepare standards which will be a guide to the industry. Therefore the Commission's task is to prepare standards and codes which are practical and acceptable. The Commission is entitled, when preparing a standard or code for the lead industry, to take into account the part which women do and can play in that industry and therefore to propose and adopt a standard and code which, in the view of the Commission, is fair to women, whilst setting proper and adequate standards and practices for adoption throughout the lead industry." This passage was not challenged on appeal and I agree with it. 34. His Honour accepted, however, the submission of counsel for Mt <<Isa>> that it is not the task of the Commission to concern itself with the implementation of the SD Act; that is the task of the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, HREOC and the Federal Court. That finding was challenged on appeal.

17 35. Counsel for HREOC argued before the primary Judge that for the purposes of s. 5 of the SD Act it is a characteristic of women that they may become pregnant and bear children (paragraphs (b) and (c) of sub-s. (1) of s. 5) and that, if it is a characteristic of women that their reproductive capacity may be damaged by a lower lead level than is the case with males (a view which officers of the Commission appear to accept), then that also is a characteristic of women within the meaning of those same paragraphs. HREOC argued before his Honour that, subject to the exceptions for which s. 44 of the SD Act provides, it is unlawful to discriminate by reason of such characteristics. 36. His Honour made the following findings which were strongly challenged in argument before us: "I would not myself read s.5 in such absolute terms. If discrimination is on the basis of danger either to the health of a woman employee, by reference to the level of lead which may affect reproductive capacity, by reason of the danger of lead to an unborn foetus or by reference to the danger of lead to a child who breastfeeds, I doubt that such discrimination is discrimination on the basis of sex as defined in s.5 of the Sex Discrimination Act. Rather it would be discrimination on the basis of health. Nor would I describe the position of a woman who was seeking to become pregnant or a woman who was pregnant or a woman who was breastfeeding a child as a circumstance that was the same or not materially different from that of a male employee in the lead industry. Nor on a prima facie basis, would I regard any proper practice recommended by the Commission in a standard or code for the lead industry as being one which was "not reasonable" having regard to the circumstances of the case, for the purposes of ss.5 and 7 of the Sex Discrimination Act. It seems to me that compliance by employers in the lead industry with any reasonable and appropriate standard and code which the Commission thought it proper to publish would not be likely to infringe any provision of the Sex Discrimination Act. Thus, I do not accept that exemption from the Sex Discrimination Act is required by an employer who desires to lay it down as a rule of practice that a woman who is breastfeeding a child should not work in a lead risk environment." 37. Later in his reasons for judgment his Honour referred to the submission of counsel for Mt <<Isa>> in these terms: "Sir Maurice Byers submitted that, if it limited its consideration in this way, the Commission would fail to deal with matters that were clearly before it and which were its function to consider. Sir Maurice submitted that officers

18 of the Commission had, by deferring to HREOC, abrogated the Commission's function or a part of its function to deal with the health and safety aspects of employment in lead risk industries and to lay down, in the form of a recommendatory standard and code, what it considered to be proper and appropriate safeguards for employees in the workplace." 38. His Honour then said this with respect to the submission of counsel for Mt <<Isa>>: "I agree with Sir Maurice's submission in this respect. It seems to me that those who drafted the proposed standard and code did so under a mistaken view that they were precluded from going further by the Sex Discrimination Act. In my opinion, the Commission has a duty to perform and, if it is of the view that certain practices are desirable in the interests of health and safety, then its function is to recommend what those practices should be. For the reasons I have already given, it is doubtful that discrimination on health grounds would infringe the Sex Discrimination Act. But even if it would, a statement by the Commission of appropriate safety precautions cannot infringe the Sex Discrimination Act. If an employer is of the view that exemption from the Sex Discrimination Act must be obtained under s.44 of the Sex Discrimination Act from HREOC before compliance with the standard and code, then the employer would be able to seek exemption from HREOC on the ground that it wished to comply with the safeguards which the Commission had recommended as desirable. HREOC would then consider whether to grant such an exemption. But it would have before it the standard and code of practice issued by the Commission and would no doubt take that into account. In brief, the Commission is entitled to take account of the object which the Sex Discrimination Act is designed to achieve, namely lack of discrimination on grounds of sex and it should, in any event, attempt to formulate a standard that is fair to employees whether male or female. But the Commission is not limited in its consideration by anything set down in the Sex Discrimination Act. Sex discrimination is a matter for the Sex Discrimination Commissioner, for HREOC and for the Federal Court. Occupational health and safety is a matter for the Commission. Those who drafted the proposed code and standard appear to have abrogated a part of the function of the Commission by accepting that HREOC should through its exemption process establish proper

19 safety precautions for the lead industry. Yet the task of establishing occupational health and safety standards is specifically conferred upon the Commission. Its function is to form its view about those matters and to state its views in the standards and codes which it publishes under s.38 of the Act. Thus, the officers of the Commission who have drafted the proposed standard and code have done so under a misapprehension of law as to the effect and ambit of the Sex Discrimination Act." 39. Counsel for the HREOC submitted on this appeal that the primary Judge erred in three major respects in his reasons for judgment, namely: (1) in expressing the view that discrimination on the ground of health would not constitute an infringement of s. 14 of the SD Act; (2) in holding that the fact that a pregnant woman or breast-feeding mother might be at greater risk from lead exposure meant that "the circumstances" were "materially different" within the meaning of s. 5(1) of the SD Act; (3) in finding that it is not the task of the Commission to concern itself with the SD Act. 40. Counsel for the HREOC also argued that, if it is necessary for the Court to consider any question of inconsistency between the SD Act and the NOHSC Act (his Honour did not find it necessary to resolve this question), the preferred view is that there is no such inconsistency. 41. Counsel for Mt <<Isa>> supported his Honour's primary findings and in particular contended as follows:-. the Commission's functions are directed solely to health and safety issues;. in preparing and publishing the proposed standard and code, the Commission's approach was determined by the provisions of the SD Act rather than by its own statutory functions under the NOHSC Act;. the Commission, in deferring to the HREOC:- (a) abrogated the Commission's function, or a part of its function, to deal with the health and safety aspects of employment in lead risk industries; (b) failed to lay down in the form of a recommendatory standard and code what it considered to be proper and appropriate safeguards for employees in the workplace; (c) transfered the Commission's functions at least in part to the HREOC, a body which is established for different purposes which do not include the promulgation of occupational health and safety standards; (d) acted on a mistaken view of the law that the Commission was precluded from performing part of its function by the SD Act; (e) failed to consider whether certain practices are desirable in the interests of health and safety and, if so, what those practices should be; and (f) acted on the mistaken view of the law that the Commission was obliged in the performance of its functions to implement the SD Act;. the provisions of the NOHSC Act are not inconsistent with the provisions of the SD Act; but if they are thought to be

Commonwealth of Australia & Anor v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1997] 664 FCA (18 July 1997) FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA>>

Commonwealth of Australia & Anor v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1997] 664 FCA (18 July 1997) FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA>> Commonwealth of Australia & Anor v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1997] 664 FCA (18 July 1997) FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA>> DISCRIMINATION LAW - Sex Discrimination Act 1984 (Cth) -

More information

COURT: IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION. Neaves J.(1) HRNG CANBERRA #DATE 22:3:1991

COURT: IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY DISTRICT REGISTRY GENERAL DIVISION. Neaves J.(1) HRNG CANBERRA #DATE 22:3:1991 Re: ALEXANDER And: HUMAN RIGHTS AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION No. ACT G55 of 1990 FED No. 112 Administrative Law (1991) EOC 92-354/100 ALR 557 COURT: IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

More information

GARDNER v AANA LTD [2003] FMCA 81

GARDNER v AANA LTD [2003] FMCA 81 FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA GARDNER v AANA LTD [2003] FMCA 81 HUMAN RIGHTS Discrimination on the grounds of pregnancy interim ban imposed to prevent pregnant women from playing in a Netball

More information

Equal Opportunity Act 1984

Equal Opportunity Act 1984 Western Australia Equal Opportunity Act 1984 As at 01 Jan 2014 Version 06-e0-00 Western Australia Equal Opportunity Act 1984 Contents Part I Preliminary 1. Short title 2 2. Commencement 2 3. Objects 2

More information

Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat

Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat The Employment (Equal Opportunity and Treatment ) Act, 1991 : CARICOM model legi... Page 1 of 30 Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat Back to Model Legislation on Issues Affecting Women CARICOM MODEL

More information

Section 37 of the NSW ICAC Act

Section 37 of the NSW ICAC Act Silent Corruption Section 37 of the NSW ICAC Act 24 April 2009 Mark Polden Level 9, 299 Elizabeth Street, Sydney NSW 2000 DX 643 Sydney Phone: 61 2 8898 6500 Fax: 61 2 8898 6555 www.piac.asn.au Introduction

More information

Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984

Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 Western Australia Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 As at 29 Nov 2012 Version 07-e0-01 Western Australia Occupational Safety and Health Act 1984 CONTENTS Part I Preliminary 1. Short title 2 2. Commencement

More information

NAGV of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1456 (27 November 2002)

NAGV of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1456 (27 November 2002) NAGV of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 1456 (27 November 2002) FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA NAGV of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous

More information

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Zentai v Republic of Hungary [2009] FCAFC 139 EXTRADITION function of magistrate in conducting hearing under s 19 of the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) function of primary judge

More information

Abbott Australasia Pty Ltd>> v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1998] FCA 1770 (31 July 1998)

Abbott Australasia Pty Ltd>> v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1998] FCA 1770 (31 July 1998) Abbott Australasia Pty Ltd>> v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Ors [1998] FCA 1770 (31 July 1998) Last Updated: 1 June 1999 FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA HUMAN RIGHTS - SEX DISCRIMINATION -

More information

Human Rights and Anti-discrimination Bill 2012 Exposure Draft

Human Rights and Anti-discrimination Bill 2012 Exposure Draft Human Rights and Anti-discrimination Bill 2012 Exposure Draft Submission to Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee December 2012 Prepared by Adam Fletcher and Professor Sarah Joseph 1 Introduction

More information

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION INTRODUCTION Freedom of information legislation, also described as open records or sunshine laws, are laws which set rules on access to information or records held by government bodies. In general, such

More information

VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT Reference: D425/2005

VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT Reference: D425/2005 VICTORIAN CIVIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL CIVIL DIVISION DOMESTIC BUILDING LIST VCAT Reference: D425/2005 CATCHWORDS Joinder of party - s.60 Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 party

More information

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Kumar v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 682 MIGRATION protection visas husband and wife tribunal found inconsistency in wife s evidence whether finding

More information

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA SZJRU v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2009] FCA 315 MIGRATION application for protection visa claim that appellant has well-founded fear of being persecuted for membership

More information

SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 20

SUPPLEMENT TO CHAPTER 20 Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth (2003) 195 ALR 24 The text on pages 893-94 sets out s 474 of the Migration Act, as amended in 2001 in the wake of the Tampa controversy (see Chapter 12); and also refers

More information

Women and Children s Safety Program. Women s Refuges and Housing Program DRAFT Bill No. XXX, April 2016 draft

Women and Children s Safety Program. Women s Refuges and Housing Program DRAFT Bill No. XXX, April 2016 draft Women and Children s Safety Program Women s Refuges and Housing Program DRAFT Bill 2016 No. XXX, 2015 15 April 2016 draft A Bill relating to financial assistance to the States, the Australian Capital Territory

More information

INTERNAL REVIEW DECISION MAKING CONSIDERING & DECIDING INTERNAL REVIEW APPLICATIONS

INTERNAL REVIEW DECISION MAKING CONSIDERING & DECIDING INTERNAL REVIEW APPLICATIONS 1. Purpose The purpose of this guidance principle is to: a) Set out the decision making process used by WorkSafe Victoria 1 to deal with applications for internal review, and b) Provide guidance for the

More information

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Caratti v Commissioner of Taxation [2016] FCA 754 File number: NSD 792 of 2016 Judge: ROBERTSON J Date of judgment: 29 June 2016 Catchwords: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE application

More information

Surveillance Devices Act 2007 No 64

Surveillance Devices Act 2007 No 64 New South Wales Surveillance Devices Act 2007 No 64 Contents Part 1 Part 2 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Relationship to other laws and matters 2 4 Definitions 2 5 Eligible Judges

More information

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA BHA17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCA 1288 File number: NSD 71 of 2017 Judge: GRIFFITHS J Date of judgment: 7 November 2017 Catchwords: MIGRATION

More information

CHAPTER 44 CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1 PRELIMINARY PART 11 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AS TO PROCEDURE

CHAPTER 44 CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART 1 PRELIMINARY PART 11 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AS TO PROCEDURE CHAPTER 44 CHILDREN AND YOUNG PERSONS ACT ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS SECTION. 1. Short title PART 1 PRELIMINARY 2. Interpretation PART 11 SPECIAL PROVISIONS AS TO PROCEDURE 3. Juvenile courts. 4. Special

More information

Date of commencement: 1st March, 1987 An Act to consolidate the law in relation to immigration and to introduce new provisions relating thereto.

Date of commencement: 1st March, 1987 An Act to consolidate the law in relation to immigration and to introduce new provisions relating thereto. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION: ACT 17/1982 Section. 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. THE IMMIGRATION ACT, 1982 Date of commencement: 1st March, 1987 An Act to consolidate the law in relation to immigration

More information

How to determine error in administrative decisions A cheat s guide Paper given to law firms What is judicial review?

How to determine error in administrative decisions A cheat s guide Paper given to law firms What is judicial review? How to determine error in administrative decisions A cheat s guide Paper given to law firms 2014 Cameron Jackson Second Floor Selborne Chambers Ph 9223 0925 cjackson@selbornechambers.com.au What is judicial

More information

Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 No 46

Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 No 46 New South Wales Child Protection (Offenders Prohibition Orders) Act 2004 No 46 Contents Part 1 Part 2 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Definitions 2 Child protection prohibition orders

More information

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 [View Regulation] [ASSENTED TO 12 OCTOBER, 1998] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 DECEMBER, 1999] (Unless otherwise indicated) (English text signed by the President) This Act

More information

Protocol for Special Medical Procedures (Sterilisation)

Protocol for Special Medical Procedures (Sterilisation) Protocol for Special Medical Procedures (Sterilisation) Made pursuant to the approval of the Australian Guardianship and Administration Council (AGAC) 6 May 2009 2 Table of Contents 1. Background... 3

More information

The Uniform Evidence Act and the Anunga Rules: Accommodation or Annihilation? Les McCrimmon*

The Uniform Evidence Act and the Anunga Rules: Accommodation or Annihilation? Les McCrimmon* The Uniform Evidence Act and the Anunga Rules: Accommodation or Annihilation? By Les McCrimmon* Introduction In 2006, the Northern Territory Law Reform Committee s (NTLRC) Report on the Uniform Evidence

More information

(1 August 2014 to date) EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT 55 OF (Gazette No , Notice No dated 19 October 1998.

(1 August 2014 to date) EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT 55 OF (Gazette No , Notice No dated 19 October 1998. (1 August 2014 to date) [This is the current version and applies as from 1 August 2014, i.e. the date of commencement of the Employment Equity Amendment Act 47 of 2013 to date] EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT 55

More information

1. Summary. UNSW CCL Submission to Review of ADT Act

1. Summary. UNSW CCL Submission to Review of ADT Act UNSW Council for Civil Liberties c/- NSW Council for Civil Liberties P.O. Box 201 Glebe NSW 2037 email: unsw_ccl@yahoo.com.au Director Legislation and Policy Division NSW Attorney General s Department

More information

DEVELOPMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE CONTEXT OF IMMIGRATION CASES. A Comment Prepared for the Judicial Conference of Australia's Colloquium 2003

DEVELOPMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE CONTEXT OF IMMIGRATION CASES. A Comment Prepared for the Judicial Conference of Australia's Colloquium 2003 DEVELOPMENTS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW IN THE CONTEXT OF IMMIGRATION CASES A Comment Prepared for the Judicial Conference of Australia's Colloquium 2003 DARWIN - 30 MAY 2003 John Basten QC Dr Crock has provided

More information

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998

EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 EMPLOYMENT EQUITY ACT NO. 55 OF 1998 [ASSENTED TO 12 OCTOBER, 1998] [DATE OF COMMENCEMENT: 1 DECEMBER, 1999] (Unless otherwise indicated) (English text signed by the President) This Act has been updated

More information

Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 No 37

Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 No 37 New South Wales Victims Rights and Support Act 2013 No 37 Contents Part 1 Part 2 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Definitions 2 Victims rights Division 1 Preliminary 4 Object of Part

More information

Official Journal of the European Communities

Official Journal of the European Communities 5.10.2002 EN Official Journal of the European Communities L 269/15 DIRECTIVE 2002/73/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 23 September 2002 amending Council Directive 76/207/EEC on the implementation

More information

International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination OPINION. Communication No. 42/2008

International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination OPINION. Communication No. 42/2008 UNITED NATIONS International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination Distr. RESTRICTED CERD CERD/C/75/D/42/2008 15 September 2009 Original: ENGLISH COMMITTEE ON THE ELIMINATION

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: Eyears v Zufic [2016] QCA 40 PARTIES: MARINA EYEARS (applicant) v PETER ZUFIC as trustee for the PETER AND TANYA ZUFIC FAMILY TRUST trading as CLIENTCARE SOLICITORS

More information

PROJET DE LOI. The Children (Guernsey and Alderney) Law, 2008 * Consolidated text. States of Guernsey 1

PROJET DE LOI. The Children (Guernsey and Alderney) Law, 2008 * Consolidated text. States of Guernsey 1 PROJET DE LOI ENTITLED The Children (Guernsey and Alderney) Law, 2008 * [CONSOLIDATED TEXT] NOTE This consolidated version of the enactment incorporates all amendments listed in the footnote below. It

More information

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 1986

Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 1986 Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (Transitional Provisions and Consequential Amendments) Act 1986 Act No. 126 of 1986 This Act was prepared on 14 April 2004 Prepared by the Office of Legislative

More information

Workplace Surveillance Act 2005

Workplace Surveillance Act 2005 Workplace Surveillance Act 2005 As at 20 May 2014 Long Title An Act to regulate surveillance of employees at work; and for other purposes. Part 1 ñ Preliminary 1 Name of Act This Act is the Workplace Surveillance

More information

DISCRIMINATION (JERSEY) LAW Revised Edition Showing the law as at 1 January 2017 This is a revised edition of the law

DISCRIMINATION (JERSEY) LAW Revised Edition Showing the law as at 1 January 2017 This is a revised edition of the law DISCRIMINATION (JERSEY) LAW 2013 Revised Edition Showing the law as at 1 January 2017 This is a revised edition of the law Discrimination (Jersey) Law 2013 Arrangement DISCRIMINATION (JERSEY) LAW 2013

More information

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: O Keefe & Ors v Commissioner of the Queensland Police Service [2016] QCA 205 CHRISTOPHER LAWRENCE O KEEFE (first appellant) NATHAN IRWIN (second appellant)

More information

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA GAGELER J PLAINTIFF S3/2013 PLAINTIFF AND MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND CITIZENSHIP & ANOR DEFENDANTS Plaintiff S3/2013 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2013] HCA 22 26

More information

CHAPTER 4 NEW ZEALAND BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990 AND HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1993 INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 4 NEW ZEALAND BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990 AND HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1993 INTRODUCTION 110 CHAPTER 4 NEW ZEALAND BILL OF RIGHTS ACT 1990 AND HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1993 Background INTRODUCTION The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (Bill of Rights Act) affirms a range of civil and political rights.

More information

Restoring Identity Stolen Generations Reparations in South Australia

Restoring Identity Stolen Generations Reparations in South Australia Restoring Identity Stolen Generations Reparations in 8 December 2011 Laura Brown, Solicitor, Indigenous Justice Program Level 9, 299 Elizabeth Street, Sydney NSW 2000 DX 643 Sydney Phone: 61 2 8898 6500

More information

General Synod Episcopal Standards (Child Protection) Canon 2017 Adopting Ordinance 2017

General Synod Episcopal Standards (Child Protection) Canon 2017 Adopting Ordinance 2017 General Synod Episcopal Standards (Child Protection) Canon 2017 Adopting Ordinance 2017 (Reprinted under the Interpretation Ordinance 1985.) Clause Table of Provisions 1....................... Name 2.......................

More information

Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process

Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process Health Practitioners Competence Assurance Act 2003 Complaints and Discipline Process The following notes have been prepared to explain the complaints process under the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance

More information

CONSTITUTION SPORTS TAEKWONDO AUSTRALIA LIMITED

CONSTITUTION SPORTS TAEKWONDO AUSTRALIA LIMITED CONSTITUTION SPORTS TAEKWONDO AUSTRALIA LIMITED Adopted: 15 November 2013 Registered: 7 January 2014 Amended: 18 August 2014 1 Contents DEFINITIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS... 6 1.1 Definitions... 6 1.2 Interpretation...

More information

CONSTITUTION AUSTRALIAN FENCING FEDERATION LIMITED

CONSTITUTION AUSTRALIAN FENCING FEDERATION LIMITED CONSTITUTION AUSTRALIAN FENCING FEDERATION LIMITED Australian Fencing Federation Limited Constitution 2015 1 Contents 1 Definitions and Interpretations... 3 2 Objects... 6 3 Powers... 7 4 Income and Property

More information

Credit Ombudsman Service. Guidelines to the. Credit Ombudsman Service Rules

Credit Ombudsman Service. Guidelines to the. Credit Ombudsman Service Rules Credit Ombudsman Service Guidelines to the Credit Ombudsman Service Rules 2nd Edition Effective: 21 February 2007 Credit Ombudsman Service Limited ACN 104 961 882 PO Box A252 Sydney South NSW 1235 www.creditombudsman.com.au

More information

Surveillance Devices Act 2007

Surveillance Devices Act 2007 Surveillance Devices Act 2007 As at 3 April 2013 Long Title An Act to regulate the installation, use, maintenance and retrieval of surveillance devices; to repeal the Listening Devices Act 1984; and for

More information

Consolidation Act on the Prohibition of Differences of Treatment in the Labour Market etc. 1)

Consolidation Act on the Prohibition of Differences of Treatment in the Labour Market etc. 1) Consolidation Act on the Prohibition of Differences of Treatment in the Labour Market etc. 1) This is an unofficial translation for informational purposes only. In case of discrepancy, the Danish text

More information

Key elements of the Work Health and Safety Bill

Key elements of the Work Health and Safety Bill Australian Mines and Metals Association Key elements of the Work Health and Safety Bill The final version of the model national OHS legislation is called the Work Health and Safety Bill, representing a

More information

Statutes Amendment (Gender Identity and Equity) Bill 2015

Statutes Amendment (Gender Identity and Equity) Bill 2015 Draft for comment (4) South Australia Statutes Amendment (Gender Identity and Equity) Bill 1 A BILL FOR An Act to amend various Acts to remove discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender,

More information

Response to the European Commission s proposed European Data Protection Regulation (COM (2012) 11 final) February 2013

Response to the European Commission s proposed European Data Protection Regulation (COM (2012) 11 final) February 2013 Response to the European Commission s proposed European Data Protection Regulation (COM (2012) 11 final) 1 21 February 2013 The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) supports the statements submitted

More information

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COURT OF QUEENSLAND CITATION: PARTIES: Waterman & Ors v Logan City Council & Anor [2018] QPEC 44 NORMAN CECIL WATERMAN AND ELIZABETH HELEN WATERMAN AS TRUSTEE UNDER INSTRUMENT

More information

THE MAURITIUS FAMILY PLANNING AND WELFARE ASSOCIATION BILL (No. XIX of 2018) Explanatory Memorandum

THE MAURITIUS FAMILY PLANNING AND WELFARE ASSOCIATION BILL (No. XIX of 2018) Explanatory Memorandum THE MAURITIUS FAMILY PLANNING AND WELFARE ASSOCIATION BILL (No. XIX of 2018) Explanatory Memorandum The main object of this Bill is to repeal the Mauritius Family Planning and Welfare Association Act 2005

More information

DISCRIMINATION (SEX AND RELATED CHARACTERISTICS) (JERSEY) REGULATIONS 2015

DISCRIMINATION (SEX AND RELATED CHARACTERISTICS) (JERSEY) REGULATIONS 2015 Discrimination (Sex and Related Characteristics) (Jersey) Regulations 2015 Arrangement DISCRIMINATION (SEX AND RELATED CHARACTERISTICS) (JERSEY) REGULATIONS 2015 Arrangement Regulation 1 Amendment of the

More information

18 August Dr Natasha Molt Senior Legal Adviser Law Council of Australia GPO Box 1989 CANBERRA ACT 2601

18 August Dr Natasha Molt Senior Legal Adviser Law Council of Australia GPO Box 1989 CANBERRA ACT 2601 18 August 2017 Our ref (NDC/FL) Dr Natasha Molt Senior Legal Adviser Law Council of Australia GPO Box 1989 CANBERRA ACT 2601 By post and by email: natasha.molt@lawcouncil.asn.au Dear Dr Molt Family Law

More information

PASTORAL AND GRAZING LEASES AND NATIVE TITLE

PASTORAL AND GRAZING LEASES AND NATIVE TITLE PASTORAL AND GRAZING LEASES AND NATIVE TITLE Graham Hiley QC The background jurisprudence in Mabo No 2, Wik and the Native Title Amendment Act 1998 concerning the extinguishment of native title on leases,

More information

In Unions New South Wales v New South Wales,1 the High Court of Australia

In Unions New South Wales v New South Wales,1 the High Court of Australia Samantha Graham * UNIONS NEW SOUTH WALES v NEW SOUTH WALES (2013) 304 ALR 266 I Introduction In Unions New South Wales v New South Wales,1 the High Court of Australia considered the constitutional validity

More information

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 8 November 1990 *

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 8 November 1990 * JUDGMENT OF 8. 11. 1990 CASE C-177/88 JUDGMENT OF THE COURT 8 November 1990 * In Case C-177/88, REFERENCE to the Court under Article 177 of the EEC Treaty by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Supreme Court

More information

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10 PETITIONER: VISHAKA & ORS.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10 PETITIONER: VISHAKA & ORS. http://judis.nic.in SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 10 PETITIONER: VISHAKA & ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 13/08/1997 BENCH: CJI, SUJATA V. MANOHAR, B. N. KIRPAL ACT:

More information

The Hon Justice Peter McClelland AM Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse GPO Box 5283 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia

The Hon Justice Peter McClelland AM Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse GPO Box 5283 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia 14 April 2015 The Hon Justice Peter McClelland AM Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse GPO Box 5283 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia Dear Justice McClelland, SUPPLEMENTARY SUBMISSION

More information

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION LMM(02)6 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION INTRODUCTION 1. Commonwealth Heads of Government at their Durban Meeting in 1999 noted the Commonwealth Freedom of Information Principles, which were endorsed by the Commonwealth

More information

Lawn Tennis Association Limited: Disciplinary Code Effective 20 September 2016

Lawn Tennis Association Limited: Disciplinary Code Effective 20 September 2016 Lawn Tennis Association Limited: Disciplinary Code Effective 20 September 2016 Index 1. Jurisdiction and Powers 1 2. Misconduct 2 3. Interim Suspension 3 4. Summary Procedure 3 5. Full Disciplinary Procedure

More information

JUDICIAL REVIEW. Courts= concerned with legality, do not have the power to vary or substitute. Can affirm original decision or set it aside

JUDICIAL REVIEW. Courts= concerned with legality, do not have the power to vary or substitute. Can affirm original decision or set it aside JUDICIAL REVIEW Courts= concerned with legality, do not have the power to vary or substitute Can affirm original decision or set it aside If set aside, then must be remitted to original decision-maker

More information

H 7340 S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D

H 7340 S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D LC00 01 -- H 0 S T A T E O F R H O D E I S L A N D IN GENERAL ASSEMBLY JANUARY SESSION, A.D. 01 A N A C T RELATING TO HEALTH AND SAFETY - THE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE ACT Introduced By: Representatives

More information

Before : MR JUSTICE LEWIS Between :

Before : MR JUSTICE LEWIS Between : Neutral Citation Number: [2014] EWHC 4222 (Admin) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION ADMINISTRATIVE COURT Case No: CO/8318/2013 Royal Courts of Justice Strand, London, WC2A 2LL Before

More information

Ferneley v The <<Boxing Authority of New South Wales>> [2001] FCA 1740 (10 December 2001)

Ferneley v The <<Boxing Authority of New South Wales>> [2001] FCA 1740 (10 December 2001) Ferneley v The [2001] FCA 1740 (10 December 2001) Last Updated: 11 December 2001 FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA Ferneley v The

More information

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA JANSSEN & JANSSEN [2016] FamCA 345 FAMILY LAW EVIDENCE Admissibility Admissibility of audio recordings made by the mother of exchanges between the parties in circumstances where

More information

The Child and Family Services Act

The Child and Family Services Act 1 The Child and Family Services Act being Chapter C-7.2 of the Statutes of Saskatchewan, 1989-90 (consult Table of Saskatchewan Statutes for effective date) as amended by the Statutes of Saskatchewan,

More information

Griffith University v Tang: Review of University Decisions Made Under an Enactment

Griffith University v Tang: Review of University Decisions Made Under an Enactment Griffith University v Tang: Review of University Decisions Made Under an Enactment MELISSA GANGEMI* 1. Introduction In Griffith University v Tang, 1 the court was presented with the quandary of determining

More information

Legal Supplement Part C to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 57, No. 41, 5th April, 2018

Legal Supplement Part C to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 57, No. 41, 5th April, 2018 Legal Supplement Part C to the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, Vol. 57, No. 41, 5th April, 2018 No. 7 of 2018 Third Session Eleventh Parliament Republic of Trinidad and Tobago HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BILL

More information

Executive summary Malta Country report on measures to combat discrimination by Tonio Ellul

Executive summary Malta Country report on measures to combat discrimination by Tonio Ellul Executive summary Malta Country report on measures to combat discrimination by Tonio Ellul 1. Introduction At the end of 2004, the Maltese population was estimated at 389,769 of which 193,917 (49.6%) were

More information

THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY

THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, 1999 Section 1. Short title 2. Commencement 3. Object of Act 4. Interpretation 5. Non-application of Act 6. Act binds the State Arrangement of Sections PART I PRELIMINARY

More information

Inquiry into the. Workplace Relations Amendment (Paid Maternity Leave) Bill 2002

Inquiry into the. Workplace Relations Amendment (Paid Maternity Leave) Bill 2002 Australian Catholic Commission for Employment Relations Submission to the Senate Employment, Workplace Relations and Education Legislation Committee Inquiry into the Workplace Relations Amendment (Paid

More information

Papua New Guinea Consolidated Legislation

Papua New Guinea Consolidated Legislation Papua New Guinea Consolidated Legislation Employment of Non-Citizens Act 2007 No. 10 of 2007. Employment of Non-Citizens Act 2007. Certified on: 1/10/2007. No. 10 of 2007. Employment of Non-Citizens Act

More information

JACOMB v AUSTRALIAN MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATIVE CLERICAL AND SERVICES UNION V477 of 2003, 2004 FCA 1250 BC

JACOMB v AUSTRALIAN MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATIVE CLERICAL AND SERVICES UNION V477 of 2003, 2004 FCA 1250 BC JACOMB v AUSTRALIAN MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATIVE CLERICAL AND SERVICES UNION V477 of 2003, 2004 FCA 1250 BC200406283 2004 Reed International Books Australia Pty Limited trading as LexisNexis FEDERAL COURT

More information

World Youth Day Act 2006 No 106

World Youth Day Act 2006 No 106 New South Wales World Youth Day Act 2006 No 106 Contents Part 1 Part 2 Preliminary Page 1 Name of Act 2 2 Commencement 2 3 Definitions 2 4 Effect of Act on police powers and other matters 3 Constitution

More information

Data Protection Bill [HL]

Data Protection Bill [HL] [AS AMENDED IN COMMITTEE] CONTENTS PART 1 PRELIMINARY 1 Overview 2 Terms relating to the processing of personal data PART 2 GENERAL PROCESSING CHAPTER 1 SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS 3 Processing to which this

More information

THEASSOCIATIONS BILL, 2018 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES. PART II THE REGISTRAR OF ASSOCIATIONS 5 Appointment and qualifications of Registrar.

THEASSOCIATIONS BILL, 2018 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES. PART II THE REGISTRAR OF ASSOCIATIONS 5 Appointment and qualifications of Registrar. THEASSOCIATIONS BILL, 2018 ARRANGEMENT OF CLAUSES PART 1 - PRELIMINARIES Clause 1 Short title and commencement. 2 Interpretation. 3 Objects of the Act. 4 Associations established in Kenya. PART II THE

More information

Bye-Laws of the Royal College of Psychiatrists

Bye-Laws of the Royal College of Psychiatrists Bye-Laws of the Royal College of Psychiatrists Adopted at the Annual General Meeting held on 25 June 2018 and approved by Order of the Privy Council dated 13 August 2018 Royal College of Psychiatrists

More information

(Legislative acts) DIRECTIVES

(Legislative acts) DIRECTIVES 15.7.2010 Official Journal of the European Union L 180/1 I (Legislative acts) DIRECTIVES DIRECTIVE 2010/41/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 7 July 2010 on the application of the principle

More information

REFUGEES ACT NO. 13 OF 2006 LAWS OF KENYA

REFUGEES ACT NO. 13 OF 2006 LAWS OF KENYA LAWS OF KENYA REFUGEES ACT NO. 13 OF 2006 Revised Edition 2016 [2014] Published by the National Council for Law Reporting with the Authority of the Attorney-General www.kenyalaw.org [Rev. 2016] No. 13

More information

Chapter 174. Industrial Relations Act Certified on: / /20.

Chapter 174. Industrial Relations Act Certified on: / /20. Chapter 174. Industrial Relations Act 1962. Certified on: / /20. INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. Chapter 174. Industrial Relations Act 1962. ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS. PART I PRELIMINARY. 1. Interpretation.

More information

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA

HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA FRENCH C, CRENNAN, KIEFEL, GAGELER AND KEANE ADCO CONSTRUCTIONS PTY LTD APPELLANT AND RONALD GOUDAPPEL & ANOR RESPONDENTS 1. Appeal allowed. ADCO Constructions Pty Ltd v Goudappel

More information

Australian Dragon Boat Federation Constitution

Australian Dragon Boat Federation Constitution Australian Government Australian Sports Commission Australian Dragon Boat Federation Constitution 1 Contents 1. Definitions and Interpretations... 7 1.1 Definitions... 7 1.2 Interpretation... 8 1.3 Corporations

More information

SPENCER KEEN S COMPARATIVE GUIDE TO THE EQUALITY ACT 2010

SPENCER KEEN S COMPARATIVE GUIDE TO THE EQUALITY ACT 2010 Overview of the Structure of the Act... 2 Introduction to the Guide... 3 Section 4 The Protected Characteristics... 4 Section 5 Definition of Age Group... 5 Section 6 Definition of Disability... 6 Section

More information

Anti-Discrimination Act 1977

Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 Anti-Discrimination Act 1977 As at 2 June 2016 See also: Local Government Amendment (Parliamentary Inquiry Recommendations) Bill 2016 [Nongovernment Bill: Rev the Hon F J Nile, MLC] Crimes and Anti-Discrimination

More information

SAINT LUCIA EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT IN EMPLOYMENT AND OCCUPATION ACT CHAPTER 16.14

SAINT LUCIA EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT IN EMPLOYMENT AND OCCUPATION ACT CHAPTER 16.14 SAINT LUCIA EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT IN EMPLOYMENT AND OCCUPATION ACT CHAPTER 16.14 Revised Edition Showing the law as at 31 December 2001 Act 9 of 2000 in force 1 April 2000 (S.I.99/2000)

More information

COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Bartram v. Glaxosmithkline Inc., 2011 BCCA 539 Date: Docket: CA Meah Bartra

COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Bartram v. Glaxosmithkline Inc., 2011 BCCA 539 Date: Docket: CA Meah Bartra COURT OF APPEAL FOR BRITISH COLUMBIA Citation: Between: And Bartram v. Glaxosmithkline Inc., 2011 BCCA 539 Date: 20111230 Docket: CA039373 Meah Bartram, an Infant by her Mother and Litigation Guardian,

More information

CONSTITUTION AUSTRALIAN HANDBALL FEDERATION LTD ACN

CONSTITUTION AUSTRALIAN HANDBALL FEDERATION LTD ACN CONSTITUTION AUSTRALIAN HANDBALL FEDERATION LTD ACN ii Contents 1. Name... 1 2. Definitions and Interpretations... 1 2.1 Definitions... 1 2.2 Interpretation... 2 2.3 Corporations Act... 3 2.4 Headings...

More information

Queensland FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1992

Queensland FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1992 Queensland FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1992 Act No. 42 of 1992 Queensland FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 1992 Section TABLE OF PROVISIONS PART 1 PRELIMINARY Division 1 Introductory Page 1 Short title.....................................................

More information

Data Protection Bill [HL]

Data Protection Bill [HL] [AS AMENDED IN PUBLIC BILL COMMITTEE] CONTENTS PART 1 PRELIMINARY 1 Overview 2 Protection of personal data 3 Terms relating to the processing of personal data PART 2 GENERAL PROCESSING CHAPTER 1 SCOPE

More information

SECOND RESPONDENT S OUTLINE OF SUBMISSIONS

SECOND RESPONDENT S OUTLINE OF SUBMISSIONS SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND REGISTRY: Brisbane NUMBER: 4189/16 Applicant: First Respondent: Second Respondent: LAND SERVICES OF COAST AND COUNTRY INC AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND

More information

Immigration Regulations 2014

Immigration Regulations 2014 REPUBLIC OF NAURU GOVERNMENT GAZETTE PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY EXTRAORDINARY G.N.No. 66 / 2014 Immigration Regulations 2014 SL No. 2 of 2014 Table of Provisions PART 1 PRELIMINARY MATTERS... 3 1 Short title...

More information

Telephone: Telephone

Telephone: Telephone Canberra ACT 0200 Australia Sydney NSW 2000 Australia Telephone: +61.2.61259518 Telephone +61.2.80080891 Email: marianne.dickie@anu.edu.au Email: liana.allan@migrationalliance.com.au Thank you for the

More information

Introduction. Australian Constitution. Federalism. Separation of Powers

Introduction. Australian Constitution. Federalism. Separation of Powers Introduction Australian Constitution Commonwealth of Australia was formed on 1st January 1901 by the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act (Imp) Our system is a hybrid model between: United Kingdom

More information

Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar) Central Information Commissioner CIC/NCFWO/A/2017/191483

Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar) Central Information Commissioner CIC/NCFWO/A/2017/191483 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION (Room No.315, B-Wing, August Kranti Bhawan, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi 110 066) Phone: 011-26181927 Fax: 011-26185088 Prof. M. Sridhar Acharyulu (Madabhushi Sridhar) Central

More information